Bepko reported on two items:
(1) the North Central Accreditation visit went “very well” and a report should
follow within the next 45 days (any portions of the report that can be made
public, will be at that time); (2) Bepko reported that the Facilities Committee
of the Board of Trustees met the consider the new campus center (discussing
plans, visual concepts and budgetary implications). Bepko announced that the
plan for the campus center would be discussed by the full Board of Trustees on December 6, 2002.

Fisher presented Frisby with
a plaque thanking him for so many years of “artful service” as the Faculty
Council Coordinator. She then presented Bepko with a photograph of the IUPUI
campus circa 1976, allowing him to see the considerable progress the university
has made under his leadership. Fisher thanked the Chancellor for excellent
service and commitment to faculty governance.

Ng
directed the faculty to complete the questionnaire and turn it in following the
meeting.

Agenda Item IX:
Discussion of the IUPUI Faculty with Representatives of the IU Board of
Trustees (5-3761, rgress@indiana.edu )
and Representatives of the IU Presidential Search Committee (5-5373, eno@indiana.edu ) Regarding the Search for
the New IU President and Including the Qualifications and Qualities for the
Next President & the Key Priorities Facing IU Over the Next Decade
[DISCUSSION ITEM: 25 Minute Limit].

NOTE:Thank you
to David Frisby for recording and transcribing this portion of the minutes.

Fred Eichhorn was present
representing the IU Board of Trustees and Marianne Wokeck was present representing
the IU Presidential Search committee. Eichhorn updated the FC regarding the
present status f the search. Steve Ferguson chairs the distinguished committee.
Ferguson, Sue Talbot, and Eichhorn represent Trustees on the
committee. Ferguson and Talbot will be at IUPUI December 10-11 to confer
with various IUPUI groups regarding the search and the qualities most desired
in the next president. The committee is open to receiving comments through
email also (eno@indiana.edu
for example). The search remains confidential at this time, to ensure the best
candidates are attracted, and aims to complete its task by the first of July.

Fisher asked for comments or
questions. Eichhorn replied to Schneider’s question regarding which consulting
firm was being used, saying the same firm out of Atlanta that did such a good job recruiting IU President
Myles Brand for the NCAA position. [Laughter] Again, Jerry Baker will run the
search.

In reply to Ford’s comment
regarding the secrecy of the search, including his question whether the
candidates might on the contrary actually desire the press, Eichhorn said
consideration would be given to making the finalists public, but only if all of
the particular candidates do not object to the exposure.

Murtadha expressed concern
that people of color had been marginalized during the search for Chancellor and
may not be given the opportunity to become President. She asked how diversity
was ensured. Eichhorn contended the committee is committed to diversity and
noted the search committee itself does include a person of color. He asked her
to take his word regarding that commitment.

Baldwin reported that at the November 12 UFC meeting the
question was raised whether it might not be better for all concerned if the IU
presidency were based at IUPUI rather than IUB (thus preventing the CEO of IU
from also becoming the CEO of IUB). Eichhorn replied the Trustees will decide
on criteria that differentiate the two positions (CEO of IU and CEO of IUB). Robert
Eno, UFC Co-Secretary and a member of the search committee, commented that the
IU President is not the CEO of the IUB campus, especially with regard to sports
programs, and warned against wishing the IU Presidency were based at IUPUI
because the faculty at IUPUI just might get what they wish for. [Laughter]

David Silk (alternate for
Goud from Education) asked about the representation of the eight IU campuses on
the committee. Eichhorn replied that although not all campuses were
represented, the various constituencies of each campus were consulted. IUB has
Robert Eno, IUPUI has Ora Pescovitz and Marianne Wokeck, there’s one from IUSE,
and several at-large members. The committee has 17 or 18 members and it would
become too big if everyone was represented, but the Trustees did their best to
ensure fair representation. Bepko noted it is important to recognize that the
number of faculty on the search committee is the same percentage as was the
case during the last presidential search.

Saatkamp contended for the
need to continue with the sense of one university, including the regionals also
and not just IUB and IUPUI. Also, that the next president should be a copy of
Bepko to whatever extent possible. Eichhorn replied that the committee
unsuccessfully considered cloning Bepko or reanimating Wells. [Laughter]

Drew Appleby (Science:
Psychology) asked what the committee’s priorities will be as they go through
the dossiers. Eichhorn replied the search committee wants to set criteria that
will make the final selection as acceptable as possible to as many people as
possible. The input received from sessions such as this will play a part in
setting the criteria. Appleby followed up suggesting “community building” be
added to the list. Eichhorn confirmed it would be.

Belcher noted that during the
search for a new IUPUI chancellor, members of the campus community were asked
to nominate candidates, and asked if something similar could be expected for
the IU Presidential search. Eichhorn replied it was a possibility.

C. Goodwin advocated that the
new president encourage partnership between IU and PU instead of competition
(with the exception of basketball), building bridges between them with
collaborative efforts in education as well as service. Eichhorn summed it up as
harmony with PU.

Vermette asked if either the
search committee or the Trustees have any general types in mind for the
position, such as someone with a background in business, or perhaps government,
for which they are specifically looking. Eichhorn replied that their minds are
not closed to any of those categories, admitting there are positives and
negatives attached to each, but emphasizing that it is the right person they
will look for in the end.

Ng closed the session for
comments and questions, thanking Eichhorn for coming and listening, and also
reminding everyone of the further sessions with Steve Ferguson and Sue Talbot
to receive input next Monday and Tuesday (Dec 10-11).

Agenda Item X: Question / Answer Period.

Ng reminded faculty to remain for the final State of the
Campus Address by Bepko. He also announced the farewell reception for outgoing
President Brand in the University Place Ballroom following the Chancellor’s
address.

IX.Discussion of the
IUPUI Faculty with Representatives of the IU
Board of Trustees (5-3761, rgress@indiana.edu
) and Representatives of the IU
Presidential Search Committee (5-5373, eno@indiana.edu
) Regarding the Search for the New IU President and Including the
Qualifications and Qualities for the Next President & the Key Priorities
Facing IU Over the Next Decade [DISCUSSION ITEM: 25 Minute Limit].

X.Question / Answer
Period.

XI.Unfinished
Business?

XII.New Business?

XIII.Adjournment for
the Chancellor's "State of the Campus" Address at 3:30 pm.